Spongey

No problem, looking forward to seeing the result!

I encountered this issue when attempting to integrate a 10 panel mosiac I was working on over a year ago.

Providing you have permitted APP to use all available RAM, the best way to get around it (other than buying more RAM) is to integrate each panel separately and then integrate together in APP. 

You may still encounter the issue but they downscale factor will be much closer to 1.

Not a mosaic but IC410 makes for a good target at this time of year and is perfectly framed with the setup!

Alternatively / in addition, a 2x2 mosaic of NGC 2244 (the Rosette nebula) would fit nicely!

Fantastic image and a significant improvement over the first!

10 hours ago, Ken82 said:

I think that’s quite good to be honest. 

Yeah I can't complain! Considering the quoted corrected image circle, my stars are very good. APS-C is the sweet spot for me and my current setup, and I feel a lot of the amateur astro-imaging community are similar in that they don't want to / can't invest in the extra gear required for full frame setups.

2 hours ago, Laurin Dave said:

also with my Esprits the stock focusers are not up to the job with a heavy camera and sag..  this cost an extra £1000 to fix 🙁

That is disappointing to hear, what would you define as 'heavy'? My current imaging train weighs in at ~1.2kg but I only expect this to increase.

14 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

The 100 doesn’t quote a corrected 44mm imaging circle, only up to 40mm.

I have found this to be true when shooting with my Canon 6D. One raw (not calibrated or debayered), stretched .jpg attached for reference.

Hence why I'll be going for the 268M / 2600MM (that and £££) 

20 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

This is good value?

https://www.modernastronomy.com/shop/cameras/cooled-ccd/qhy-cooled-ccd-cameras/qhy600l-lite-mono-cmos-cooled-camera/

I was thinking about the price point of the 268M?  If it’s much more than the 268C version then the 600L represents exceptional value. It’s still dear but a heck sensor area in mono in the latest CMOS technology?

If the only differences are a smaller DDR buffer and body size then yes, it is exceptional value for what it is. I note that 'only' a C grade sensor is guaranteed with this model, and that does not appear to be applicable to the non-L version. Info on the differences can be found here.

What is not to be forgotten is the additional cost that comes with 2" filters, a larger filter wheel, and a scope that can provide a corrected image circle that large!  If you have all of these things already / the budget for them, then by all means the QHY600L seems like the better option; you are getting more chip per £ than you likely will be with the 268M.

15 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

I’ve not spoken to all the ZWO suppliers but the one I did had no information on release.   Info above is 2 weeks old too 

Ah okay, that's good to know, cheers.

FLO didn't have any official info yet either, but said that they'd take a note and keep me informed when they knew more. At the end of the day I'm not too fussed whether I have a QHY or ZWO camera, as long as it works! 

5 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Once I heard there was no idea on the timing of the ZWO camera

As far as I'm aware (details above), the timing situation with both cameras is the same, and both QHY and ZWO appear to be on track for early next year release. do you have information to the contrary?

2 minutes ago, tooth_dr said:

Well I decided to put my name down for a QHY268M. 

Did you do this through Bern at Modern Astronomy?

I registered my early interest (for the ZWO version) with FLO last week but they don't appear to have any official form of queueing system for launches like this.

Thank you!

11 minutes ago, geeklee said:

What was it captured with, if you don't mind posting?

I have updated the OP with details

We had a clear spell the night before last up until about midnight, so I used to time to get some testing done on my new Sesto Senso 2, which worked excellently!

The result was a total of 3.5 hours of half decent data on M45, progressively improving as the target rose out of the light pollution dome. Had a go at processing it despite needing much more data, and was pleased with the result. I can only imagine what a new camera such as the upcoming ASI 2600MM would give in the same time...

Captured with my Esprit 100 and unmodified Canon 6D, riding on a CEM40. 

Processed in PixInsight and Adobe Lightroom

Cheers

I have used both (trial version of APP), and settled on PixInsight as I prefer it, and personally believe it to be a much more powerful tool.

APP is more user-friendly and automated, as noted above, and does have some great automated features that PI lacks, such as mosaic registration and integration. This is a much more involved task in PI, but can be done.

If you are willing to get your head around the interface of PixInsight then it is well worth it and can do incredible things. There are some great resources out there to assist with that too, such as 'Mastering PixInsight', and 'Inside PixInsight'.

I couldn't resist having a further play with this data. This time configured as HaOSH

Cheers

Once again just incredible data to work with, the Sii in particular is an absolute treat!

This has got to be my favourite dataset so far, something about this object is just so appealing; the dark dust lanes looping from the bottom left up and around into the propeller are so delicate and yet hold so much detail!

My first attempt, configured as HaSHO, maintaining a hint of green to bring out some aqua colouring. I will quite likely update this at some point...

Cheers

I am lost for words and truly humbled... All I can say is thank you! I truly never thought I'd be in this position so to be here is quite special. 

A resounding thank you to FLO and IKI for organising these competitions to provide us all with such fantastic data.

Congratulations to everyone who entered, and to Selmak and Derbyshire Dave in particular!

That's very kind, thank you!

47 minutes ago, AbsolutelyN said:

That file had no flats

This explains a lot! But yes, your star shapes aren't the best around the periphery of the frame for sure, do you have the backfocus 100% nailed in? I feel like more of the image should have round stars than it does...

Compared to Goran's excellent M31 with the same scope + camera (although these were taken from the .jpg so won't be entirely accurate):

4 hours ago, AbsolutelyN said:

However I do challenge anyone to process the attached file

Hi AbsolutelyN, I just had a quick go at processing your file for fun, and agree that there is some banding in the background visible after DBE. Once stretched and setting the background to a good level though it wasn't too visible, and adjusting the background (minus stars) saturation helped eliminate it.

It's far from my best work but shows that the problems you have are certainly manageable with careful processing!

Not sure your flats are correcting properly as the very corners are quite dark indeed compared to the rest of the image after stretching. I cropped them out for this process.

Cheers

Sony has now officially announced the IMX571 mono!

The details can be found here: Product flyer

and here: Product list

Latest info on the 2600mm: Sam from ZWO has commented on the ZWO forum that is should be ready at the start of next year!

Haven't heard any news on the QHY268M, anyone know if there has been any official communication regarding it?

Cheers

1 minute ago, vlaiv said:

Framing is a bit strange?

Yes, I didn't bother rotating the camera to fit the whole galaxy in as I was imaging for test purposes.

I wish I did now, but it makes a good phone background nonetheless 🙂

A couple of nights ago I was running some tests on my Esprit 100 as detailed in this thread: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/345575-esprit-100-pinched-optics

I didn't think that the data from the night would be in any way shape or form useful other than to characterise the issue present, due to the 90% moon not too far from the target. Either way, after stacking and stretching the data I decided to have a go at processing it anyway, and was surprised to see the result!

This image represents 3 hours and 28.5 minutes of data taken in 90s subs.

Taken with my Esprit 100 and Canon 6D, processed in PixInsight and Adobe Lightroom.

Constructive criticism welcome as always!

Cheers

A quick 1 hour integration on M45, cropped to the main cluster as the edge stars aren't great with a 40mm image circle on my sensor anyway. This has only been DBE'd and lightly stretched, and is uploaded in full resolution. As you can see the effect is visible on all of the bright stars, and also some of the smaller ones. Last night was much colder, around 2 degrees for this hour and again I had the dew heater running on full whack. Any further thoughts?

P.S. I know I need to take new flats 😉

I also did a short run on M31 last night. The effect is also visible on a lot of the stars in this image, down to magnitude 10 (cropped but uploaded at full resolution):

Thanks to all for your responses. 

2 hours ago, Laurin Dave said:

have similar with my Espirt100, I contacted FLO and got this response:-

Dave, I got a similar response to you from FLO and have also decided to keep the scope as is. If it becomes a real issue over winter then I might reassess but I can live with it for now.

5 hours ago, Adam J said:

You need to upload a full resolution image I feel like that is a down sampled, but perhaps its just the big pixels on the 6D?

Adam, this is a full resolution image; unfortunately the big pixels on the 6D mean that I am undersampling significantly. I plan to resolve this with a new dedicated astro-camera in the coming months

5 hours ago, Adam J said:

You would do well to test by pointing at something like m45

That's a good idea, and the spacing between the bright stars will also show how the effect differs over the frame. I am running a sequence on M45 now to test.

Thanks again to everyone who responded, you have helped put my mind at ease

Cheers

Apologies for reviving this thread but I appear to be having a similar problem with my new Esprit 100.

This has only shown itself on the colder nights, so last night (~7 degrees ambient) I decided to run a test sequence on Vega to try and characterise the issue.

I've attached a 1:1 crop of a 20 minute stack of Vega, taken with my Canon 6D.

This looks, as discussed earlier in the thread, like the six lens clips are very slightly pinching the objective lens. 

For reference I shot this with my dew heater running at 100% to try and combat the issue.

I've already sent an email to FLO about this but just wanted to see if anyone else had any suggestions?

Cheers

As expected, amazing data once again! Here is my first attempt; I'll probably update this but it just goes to show what is possible...

Cheers

EDIT: Updated to retain a little more of the core and shadows detail